and one that has been in the making for nearly 100 years. >> paying it forward. shall we say, is just the icing on the cake. it is a beautiful story. maybe it is one that the world needs to hear. >> reporter: nbc news, coronado, california. >> it absolutely is a story the world needs to hear and it goes to show you that you never know how the amazing ripple effect of one act of bravery, what it can produce. on that extraordinary note, i wish you a very goodnight. i told you i was giving you sweet dreams tonight. thanks for staying up late with me. see you tomorrow. with me. see you tomorrow. tonight on all in. >> we are looking at tiktok. we may be banning tiktok. >> a tiktok flip-flop for the

ages. >> the thing i don't like is that without tiktok, you could make facebook bigger. >> tonight, the tiktok vote. and a major flashing warning sign of a cash-strapped candidate. >> steve bannon has suggested you have been paid off to switch your view. >> then what three dismissed fellmy counts means for defendant trump in georgia and the rebirth of a decades old campaign trope. >> people look around and they say am i better off now than i was four years ago? >> the very painful answer to the trump campaign's question. >> doctors say it will wash through, flow through. interesting terms. and, very accurate. >> when all in starts right now. good evening from new york. i'm chris hayes. the house of representatives passed a bill today which could eventually lead to the banning of tiktok. the chinese social media app

used by some 150 million americans. it was a somewhat surprising move from congress in this respect. this congress has not been known to pass a lot of substantive bipartisan legislation. but that's what this was. the bill passed 352-65. basically nothing passes by those margins and it cut against traditional partisan lines. the bill earned the enthusiastic support of both the far right speaker of the house mike johnson and his democratic predecessor nancy pelosi. ranging from congresswoman marjorie tailor greene to alexandria ocasio-cortez. this is an interesting and really thorny issue. personally, i find myself compelled by arguments on both sides of it. on the one hand, tiktok is an incredibly popular tool. a third of americans under 30 say they get their news regularly from the app. and yet no one has any insight

into its internal workings. we don't know who is getting shown what or for what reason. there is no way to have any sense of how the algorithm works. the director of national intelligence warns the all-star is filled with chinese propaganda accounts. that the app attempted to divide social relations. there is not that much congress can do in a deep sense to regulate it. tiktok is not accountable primarily to u.s. regulators. it is primarily and fundamentally accountable to the chinese government. it is a chinese government and the chinese government gets to tell it what to do. american social media companies like facebook are sure as heck not allowed to operate in china. so just as a fair trade argument you could say the same standards should apply to

chinese platforms here. on the other hand, every point i just made about the opaqueness of the algorithm, the risk of misinformation and disinformation, seeking to exacerbate u.s. divisions, all that, that can also be made about all those american competitors. who are we kidding? as you watch this legislation voted in today, and the debate, it highlights an essential question. about how democracy functions. how legislation is made. and fundamentally what we want our political representatives to do. we unteam this to evaluate arguments. ultimately make good faith judgments about what they think is best for the country and for the people they represent. what we don't want our representatives doing is what happens too much in congress. siding with the folks who write the biggest checks. that is particularly true if the politician in question is

in desperate financial straits willing to do anything including selling off their own political platform to any person willing to pony up the most cash. which brings us to the most prominent republican opponent of today's bill. one donald trump. now, the ex-president we should note is a bit of a late convert to the pro tiktok cause. here he is as president four years ago. threatening to ban the app out right. >> we might be banning tiktok. we might be doing some other things. there are a couple of options but a lot of things are happening so we will see what happens. but we are looking at a lot of alternatives with respect to tiktok. >> in fact, trump tried to go through with that ban. though ultimately it fell apart. thrown out by the courts. but here he is two days ago in the runup to this vote on cnbc announcing opposing a ban. >> frankly, a lot of people on tiktok love it. a lot of young kids on tiktok

who will go crazy without it. there there are a lot of users and a lot of good and bad with tiktok but the thing i don't like is without tiktok, you could make facebook bigger and i consider facebook to be an enemy of the people. >> right. you may remember facebook banned him. trump has a vendetta against zuckerberg. the flip-flop didn't come out of nowhere. get this. it was just like two weeks ago, when this vote was scheduled. a republican megadonor jeff yass made the trip down to mar- a-lago to kiss trump's ring. yass has been something of a trump skeptic before. it is notable because he

cofounded a trading firm that owns 15% of tiktok's parent company and has a personal stake in the company worth tens of billions of dollars. jeff yass who is an enormous republican donor has a lot riding on this decision. okay? you don't have to be a genius to put two and two together. thanks to mitch mcconnell, and the john roberts supreme court, we effectively have no real actual meaningful campaign finance left in the country. someone like jeff yass who has billions of dollars on the line can write a billion dollar check to trump's superpac if he is so inclined. might get a good return on that investment. so it should come as no surprise that the ex-president left that meeting with yass

with a newfound appreciation for tiktok. and here's the thing. this is not a one off. i am telling you right now, this is now the way policy is going to get formed in this campaign. and in a possible second trump term when the man is in acute financial distress and does not have the liquidity to pony up what he owes in legal penalties. he is way behind in fund raising because he and his operation have already cannibalized huge amounts of small dollar donations already in order to pay off tens of millions of dollars in legal fees. legal fees that going anywhere will probably get worse. a core part of trump's appeal was this lie. that his personal wealth would allow him immune to outside influence. >> hillary clinton's campaign is funded by wall street and

hedge fund managers. my campaign is powered by my money. i'm self-funneling so i'm not controlled by all those people that control cruz and hillary. crooked hillary. i have tens and tens and millions of dollars. nobody else does. i put my own money into this. >> okay, that was always a lie. he raised huge sums of money from donors. in that campaign. right now, he is more beholden to donors than ever before. he owes millions of dollars. the small donations they have been just cranking. right? are showing signs of running dry. there is only so many $10 donations you can get out of people. and so, name your price, billionaires. we have seen it with tiktok.

another unpopular position he once opposed but seems open to because it is what extremely wealthy donors want to see. the ex-president is strapped for cash and the republican platform and america's governing agenda perhaps is up for auction to the highest bidder. joining me now is one of the coauthors of the bill. he serves the ranking member on the intelligence select committee and the china special committee. congressman, first i guess i would say it is striking that given donald trump's opposition to the border bill and to ukraine funding, essentially acted effectively as a veto. him coming out to oppose this bill did nothing. it didn't affect him in any way today. >> yes. you are correct. look, people saw it as a flip- flop. they knew as i was talking to my republican colleagues on the

other side, they saw this as a transaction he had engaged in. and it doesn't really affect the way that they would end up voting. all that being said, i thought for a certain period of time, i think that the folks on the other side who were whiping the votes were monitoring closely to see what would happen. but they didn't see an appreciable change in people's position. >> i want to give you some of the arguments i have heard against this bill or concerns so you can address them because you have been a big champion. the first is prioritization. i talked to people the last few days like we are banning tiktok? seems like there is a lot the country needs right now. we haven't passed the ukraine funding bill. there are enormous priorities. it is weird this is so pressing that we have to ban tiktok? what do you say to that? >> first of all, you are absolutely right. we have to do the special supplemental aid to ukraine for instance. and we need to do it. we should have done it months

ago. and at this point i don't control what comes before the house. but this is important. this particular bill. it is not a ban on tiktok. but it is a force divesting of tiktok by byte dance and byte dance as you know is basically controlled by the chinese communist party. the editor in chief of byte dance is the secretary of the ccp cell embedded at the highest echelon of the company. and he has been tasked with making sure that tiktok and all products adhere to correct political direction. so what we are asking and as part of this bill, requiring, is to reduce the ownership. to beneath 20%. the threshold by the way for foreign ownership in any broadcast outlet in the united states. and making sure that we delength the chinese communist party's control of tiktok from

its operation. >> my understanding is that everyone knows and the ccp has said they won't allow for that. so the inevitable result will be tiktok goes away. we all know that is going to happen. that is what is understood to be the path forward? >> no, not necessarily. you know, the economy in china is tanking right now, chris. xi jinping, the paramount leader, is at pains to court foreign investment to help resuscitate the chinese economy right now. basically, there has been a shift in thinking about how they would view byte dance and zero out that investment. which is worth billions and billions of dollars right now. even at the same time they are trying to resuscitate their economy. you know, i think that whatever happens, it is obviously up to byte dance and it is up to beijing. but, we don't want beijing to

control this platform. >> there is another argument i have seen. which is basically look, we have foreign companies that operate in the u.s. all the time. it is a globalized capitalism. and we have regulations that all companies across the board have to adhere to. so if you are a foreign car manufacturer and you want to sell the car here, it has to comply with what the ntsb and other regulators say. if there are concerns about control, about data privacy, whatever, like, you could just pass some package of regulations for all social media apps and say this is the standard. doesn't matter if you are instagram or tiktok. you have to abide. but that is not what we are doing. we are just going after tiktok. why? >> you can't regulate the ccp. it is one thing if there was truly a private entity that was investing here and it is not a foreign adversary controlled entity investing here. but what we have is the ccp controlling this entity.

as a consequence, unfortunately. >> what does that mean? when you say the ccp controlling it? there ease a lot that could mean. just put some meat on the bones of that assertion. >> sure. there are a couple of laws in china. the national security law of 2017 which requires that any company in china must provide access to the ccp. to all of its data on any user anywhere in the world. in addition there is something called the 1993 company law that requires that the ccp embed a party cell at the highest ranks of the company to control the company's operations. both of those are in effect with regard to byte dance. tiktok has repeatedly tried to

assure american regulators they can divorce themselves from byte dance's control and ultimately the ccp's control. however, repeatedly, the representations have been false. first, they claimed that american user data would be stored here in america or in singapore. that was false. a lot of the data is stored on prc servers including sensitive financial data. second, they claimed that nobody in china would be able to access this american user data. that was also proven to be false. because people in china routinely engineers in china access the data even unbeknown to tiktok, usa employees. and third and finally, they claim that none of this data had been weaponnized against americans. that was false. the best example of this was the surveillance of american journalists using their geo

location data ton tiktok. they revealed the previous representations had been false. so when they keep making these false representations, and not being candid, that further makes lawmakers very suspicious. >> all right, congressman roger who notched a big legislative victory. thanks for joining us tonight. >> thank you, chris. coming up, in a consequential week for the georgia prosecution, a surprise decision by the judge. not the big one you thought it might be but it has a lot of effect. what does it mean for the case against the ex-president? we will get into it next. we will get into it next.

i still love to surf, snowboard, and, of course, skate. so, i take qunol magnesium to support my muscle and bone health. qunol's extra strength, high absorption magnesium helps me get the full benefits of magnesium. qunol, the brand i trust. her uncle's unhappy. i'm sensing an underlying issue. it's t-mobile. it started when we got him under a new plan. but then they unexpectedly unraveled their "price lock" guarantee. which has made him, a bit... unruly. you called yourself the "un-carrier". you sing about "price lock" on those commercials. "the price lock, the price lock..." so, if you could change the price, change the name! it's not a lock, i know a lock. so how can we undo the damage? we could all unsubscribe and switch to xfinity. their connection is unreal. and we could all un-experience this whole session. okay, that's uncalled for.

the superior court judge threw out six counts in georgia bringing them down from to 88. this is the first of two rulings we are expecting from the judge. the second of course, the ruling on efforts to disqualify fulton county district attorney fani willis in the case. we will expect that decision to come soon. some of what the judge today should shed some light on how he could rule on that. joining me now to decode the judge's ruling is katie fang, who has been following this case almost closer than anyone else. katie, first just take us

through what arguments the defense made about the charges here and why the judge felt compelled to discard them. >> reporter: yes, so there is a vehicle and criminal procedure in georgia called a special demur. basically, it is the defense saying we need more specificity if we want to prepare for the charges set forth in the indictment. and judge mcafee found in certain respects, some of the counts in the indictment that was returned by a grand jury i want to emphasize that, some of these counts did actually meet that standard to merit being dismissed. the idea is they are all the same charges. it is solesslessation of a state official to violate and earth. they all, the state officials are secretary of state brad and they took an oath. the united states constitution

and the georgia constitution have so many different amendments, closets, et cetera. you have to be able to specify which of those clauses of the constitutions were violated by these particular defendants. that's it. as you noted in the setup, chris, the judge made sure that it was clear for him to note in the footnote. the entire indictment is not dismissed. willis can seek reindictment on these particular charges with a grand jury. she can seek to appeal it or you know, she can cut her losses now and say i'm good to go. otherwise, this is a temporary dismissal without prejudice. and she could seek recourse to get them back. >> if we could put up the charges i remember. it is funny. i remember when this came out. i remember thinking solicitation, violation of oath by public officer. three of the ones dismissed. i don't think i thought of that at the crime or i have never

seen that before. it is too vague to be chargeable essentially. >> under georgia law, the district attorney has two chances to get it right and then urge georgia law, if you don't get it right, it is dismissed with prejudice. the big one is count one. the rico count. in georgia, the rico state statute in georgia allows for a stand alone crime of rico and then you set forth the different acts committed by this big experience across the united states of the charged defendants and uncharged coconspirators. that is what people need to remember. that famous phone call, find me the votes that people think is now gone. it is not gone. it is still an overt act part of count one, the rico count and the judge made it clear that the other counts were not gone. >> i mentioned there is another ruling. the big one we are waiting on. which is how the judge rules on

the motion to dismiss willis from the case. do you think you got any light. is there any indication on that? >> we could expect it by friday. it could come earlier. but some news dumps happen on friday at 5:00 as it were. but you know, reading tea leaves a little bit. why would judge mcafee change the order? if fani willis, her entire office is off the case, the case has to be reassigned but she has six months to get this right. and i don't think he would do that knowing that there is a potential for that six month period to run if there is mo tolls of that six month period. so it wouldn't make total sense in addition if you have to go back to the grand jury. chris, which grand jury are you going back to if you disqualify

fani willis? it is reading tea leaves but you'll have to wait and see. >> that's an interesting point. thank you very much for flagging that. thank you katie. a pleasure as always. still ahead, after house democrats grill special council robert hur about what he left out of his report, congressman eric swalwell joins me right here on the latest republican spectacle next. latest republic spectacle next.

do you have a life insurance policy you no longer need? now you can sell your policy - even a term policy - for an immediate cash payment. call coventry direct to learn more. we thought we had planned carefully for our retirement. but we quickly realized we needed a way to supplement our income. our friend sold their policy to help pay their medical bills, and that got me thinking. maybe selling our policy could help

with our retirement. i'm skeptical, so i did some research and called coventry direct. they explained life insurance is a valuable asset that can be sold. we learned we could sell all of our policy, or keep part of it with no future payments. who knew? we sold our policy. now we can relax and enjoy our retirement as we had planned. if you have $100,000 or more of life insurance, you may qualify to sell your policy. don't cancel or let your policy lapse without finding out what it's worth. visit coventrydirect.com to find out if your policy qualifies. or call the number on your screen. coventry direct, redefining insurance.

since the day he has been inaugurated, republicans have wanted to impeach joe biden but it has become clear their impeachment efforts are an embarrassing debacle. yesterday was kind of their second best chance to have a big moment. a public hearing with the special counsel who went out of the way to disparage the president in his report after concluding there was no evidence he committed any crimes by having classified documents in his possession after leaving the vice presidency. that hearing did not go quite as republicans had planned. with the democrats ready to confirm robert hur about his report, congressman swalwell laid out the effort of the president who appointed him. >> you want to be perceived as credible. >> yes. >> a lot has changed since 2018 for the person who appointed you. former president trump. since you were appointed, he

was impeached for leveraging 350 million u.s. dollars over ukraine to get dirt on biden. he was charged with possessing classified documents and obstructing justice. for paying for the silence of a porn star, charged in georgia for his role january 6th. charged in the district of columbia for his role january 6th. he owes $400 million to the state of new york for defrauding the state through his taxes. and he has been judged a rapist. you want to be perceived understandably as credible and so i want to first see if you will pledge to not accept an appointment from donald trump if he is elected again as president. >> congressman, i don't. i'm not here to testify. >> seems like an easy answer.

>> joining me here is congressman eric swalwell. you did not get a pledge to not take an appointment. what did you think about yesterday? >> first, we wanted to make it clear that president biden was not charged. somebody else who possessed classified materials. donald trump was charged and special council hur mischaracterized the president's memory. the word photographic left off the page. the special council said your memory, your recall, appear to be photographic. he doesn't put that in the report and it contradicts the idea that obama had any memory issues. >> it did seem like yesterday that it does seem to me like the impeachment undertaking is collapsing under its own weight. even troy a republican congressman who i think wants to be peached by biden.

is that your sense of where things go? >> a corner would pronounce it dead. it is not going anywhere. they don't have anything. they just don't accept joe biden as president. but the cul-de-sac they are in is interesting. the marjorie taylor greens and matt gaetzs say that an impeachment vote is coming. how do you criminally refer someone you are not going to impeach? they are stuck. because they don't have anything. >> speaking of stuck, we still don't have a vote on this aid package. i'm frankly gob smacked. there is one man who is stopping it. donald trump. we know that. and, well, approximate to him is mike johnson. there are now discharge petitions. it is like a west wing plot point. it is a way of doing the

speaker to get some into the floor. you need the majority of people to sign on. there are two discharged petitions. >> most republican haves shown they will go all in with trump. and the speaker has a number of ways to try to navigate around the discharge petition. we need to put this on him. either you are soft on russia or you will stand with freedom in ukraine and we have to paint them as soft on russia, soft on terror. and not the party that my two republican parents raised me to believe they were. to defend freedom everywhere. >> do you think that lands? why does mike johnston care if you or others say that? >> he cares because we will be voting in november. and i think americans still believe that our country is strong in the world and we

understand that if freedom is affected in europe, freedom in america will soon also be affected. the republicans tell us they are strong on china and they would defend taiwan. why the hell would taiwan think we would defend them if we can't even stay on the fight on russia? you have to connect those dots as well. >> you brought up two topics. china and freedom. they are relative to the vote that happened on the floor today. i wanted to ask you, you were on the other side of your colleague. you voted against the legislation that would force the sale of tiktok or ban it if it wasn't sold. why did you vote that way? >> this was not an easy one. i can see how people arrive. at their conclusion. there are a lot of policies in

place. issues around privacy and control that the chinese government may have. but for me, i don't like republican bans on books or bodies and i don't want anything that gets close to us having a ban on speech. small businesses and young people really do rely on tiktok and hundreds of millions of people watch the president's state of the union on tiktok. that is how they received information about it. so it makes me nervous. >> and we should note the state of montana passed statewide legislation to ban tiktok. the first of its kind in the country. run into a problem in federal court. that law is currently enjoined if i'm not mistaken. there are real thorny issues. >> that is why we should do it more broadly. i would love for all social media company to have more accountability and for us to

have more regulations around algorithms and data and privacy. >> ken buck surprised congressional leadership saying he is out. they didn't get a heads up. they are now at their retreat. >> some of them. >> so, i tried to explain this one the other day. why this is a big deal. there are big deal. you all get together. you don't spend a lot of time all of you together. this is the one opportunity. >> the families come, too. >> this is only 100 house republicans less than half the caucus expected at this retreat. why is that a big deal? >> the morale is low. they take chip roy at his word. i don't know why anybody would reelect us. we have not delivered on anything. they are wasting the time and the congress to address ukraine. as well as of course, more security at the border which the president stands ready to

do. >> congressman swalwell, a great pleasure to have you here. coming up, it is hard to fathom what life was like four years ago, but the trump campaign asks us to focus on it so we will oblige them next. wi. (psst! psst!) ahhh! with flonase, allergies don't have to be scary. spraying flonase daily gives you long lasting non-drowsy relief. flonase all good. also, try our allergy headache and nighttime pills.

frustrated by skin tags? dr. scholl's has the breakthrough you've been waiting for. the first fda-cleared at-home skin tag remover clinically proven to remove skin tags safely in as little as one treatment. why choose a sleep number smart bed? can i make my side softer? clinically proven to remove skin tags i like my side firmer. sleep number does that. the queen sleep number c4 smart bed is only $1,599, save $300. shop now at sleepnumber.com

as we reported, donald trump and joe biden became the presumptive nominees for their

respective parties for president. they both have records to run on which is why trump allies keep asking this question. >> and people look around and they say am i better off now than i was four years ago? the answer to that is no. you can compare how much better your life was with donald trump in office and how much worse you are now that joe biden is in office. >> they just keep trying to squeeze out a little more juice from that ronald reagan campaign slogan hoping we have wiped 2020 from our memory. it is a good question and republicans will keep asking it, we should keep trying to answer it. how good was your life four years ago today? on march 13th, 2020? on that day, donald trump held a 72 minute long press conference in the rose garden to address the coronavirus and so i wanted to show you what that press conference looked like in relation to the actual facts of what was being reported on that very day.

>> breaking news, president trump declaring the coronavirus a national emergency. >> a national emergency. two very big records. >> reporter: at least 41 deaths, all schools closing in a growing number of states. millions of students impacted, houses of worship suspending services. landmarks, theme parks, sporting events and concerts shutting down. >> we don't want people to take a test if we feel that they shouldn't be doing it. 1.4million tests on board next week. and, 5 million within a month. i doubt we will need anywhere near that. >> reporter: the drive through stations overflowing. president trump vowing to boost testing and says he takes no responsible for widespread delays. >> mr. fauci said earlier this week that the lag in testing was in fact a failing. to you take responsibility for that? >> no. i don't take responsibility at all. >> reporter: the chaos at

grocery store lines where they stretch out the door. shelves cleared out. >> at this new york grocery store, customers stood for two hours to check out. aisles usually chock full of toilet papers, paper towels, pasta, now laid bare with nothing left. >> it was chaos. >> these guys have gotten a lot of toilet paper. did you need to give guidance that toilet paper is not an effective protection against the coronavirus? >> hospitals bracing for a possible surge in patients. already reporting shortages of masks and protective clothing. will there be enough beds? >> you said that you don't take response ct. but you did disband the white house pandemic office. officials said that the white house lost valuable time because that office was disbanded. what do you make of that? >> i think it is a nasty question. some of the doctors say it will wash through. it will flow through. interesting terms. and, very accurate i think you will find in a number of weeks it will be a very accurate

term. >> nervous. scare. confused. not really sure what is going on. >> or worse, it could get worse. >> that, just to be clear, that all happened on the same day. we didn't like stitch together a week of footage. that was march 13th, 2020. one day. so how about it? better off than you were four years ago? exactly four years ago? i will leave that for you to decide. for you to decide.

this morning was reported that the republican senate retreat would feature a very high profile keynote speaker. israeli prime minister benjamin netanyahu. the moment he was canceled he was replaced by herzog. he has been in conflict with joe biden over the aims of israel's continuing war in gaza as the situation on the ground gets more dire by the day. with more than 30,000 palestinians dead. 2million displaced and hundreds of thousands right now at risk of starvation across the territory. last week, after state of the union address, biden was caught on a hot mic essentially saying things are going to change for

netanyahu. >> i told him. u. >> i told him. >> don't repeat this. i'm on a hot mic. much of that frustration centers around calls for a cease fire. the desire to prevent. an israeli incursion into the city of rafah. the last place where people sought ref future. there are 1.4 million palestinians there. just days later, netanyahu insisted that offensive which the biden administration opposes will go forward. they say united states should not provide military assistance to any country that interferes with u.s. humanitarian assistance. i'm joined by the lead signature of that letter, senator bernie sanders of

vermont. senator, what is your aim here with this letter? >> chris, my aim is to make it clear that israel is breaking the law. this is not debatable. section 6201 of the foreign policy act makes it clear that any country that interferes with the provision of u.s. humanitarian aid will not get funding from the united states of america. and that is hearly what israel is doing. what is going on is you have just indicated, i hope everyone understands it. it is unprecedented and unspeakable. it is not just then tens of thousands killed and wounded. at this moment, as we speak, hundreds of thousands of children are facing starvation. and the reason for that is

netanyahu's right wing government is blocking the borders preventing the massive amount of aid that needs to get through. from getting through. and people are dying as a result. that is in violation of american law. we should stop funding netanyahu's war machine. >> i should say here that the israeli government and particularly the unity government running the war since the attack by hamas on october 7, they say they are not blocking aid. they say they are blocking dual use goods. letting aid through. the fault of the aid groups or the u.s. or others, you do not seem swayed by that contention. >> no, not at all. everybody knows what is going on. we saw several senators, senator van holland, senator merkley at the border. they are doing these checks which take hours and hours and slowing up the ability of trucks to get through. everybody knows that is the case. and that has to change.

we cannot as a nation be complicit in the starvation of human beings and children. >> there is an urgent humanitarian issue here. which is the fact that again, the u.n. world food program. people that don't have a particular political dog in the fight saying look, this is an emergency situation of mass starvation. and just the fact it seems clear increasingly that the politics for joe biden are basically the opposite of the politics for prime minister netanyahu. that the longer the war goes in some ways, the more he is spared from the possibility of calls for new elections. that his coalition falling apart. where the longer this goes, the worse it is for the democratic coalition. which is extremely torn apart on this issue. >> absolutely. and i would argue, chris, it is not just the democratic base

and young people who are very, very distraught by what is going on as they should be. it is people all across the world. if you are a conservative republican, you don't want america in the starvation of children. and bottom line is the law is being broken. the law has got to be enforced and if israel does not open the borders and allow the thousands of trucks that are needed to feed desperate people in funding should stop. >> you have a new proposal this week. that i just saw today. which i have actually been thinking about because i have been doing some research on the movement that pushed for the 40 hour workday or the eight hour workday. for a book i'm writing. and, the legislation would move past that to a 32 hour workweek with no loss of pay. that it is not a radical idea. it is time for working people to benefit with advances in ai.

not just corporate ceos and stockholders. how would legislation like that work? >> the 40 hour week as i recall was established in 1940. that was 83 years ago. there have been a few modest changes in the economy over the last 84 years. and what has gone on is workers today are far more productive. so, the question that we will be asking tomorrow is who benefit ins from all of the changes that have taken place in the economy, the new technology and the artificial intelligence and robotics that are sitting around the corner that will transform the entire economy. most people, you got a job today, it will be very different ten, 10 years from today if you have that job. so what we are saying is with

all of this new technology, an increase in worker productivity, workers should benefit from these changes. >> senator bernie sanders, a pleasure, sir. >> thank you on the economic prospects, first saw a day when the prime problem of american capitalism would be leisure. what to do with all the leisure time. we would just be sitting around. but it didn't work out that way. that is all in this wednesday night. alex starts now. wednesday night. alex starts now.